Comment on Congress Moving Forward On Unconstitutional Take It Down Act

• EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  At least two members of SCOTUS are definitely playing that game

  source

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Two members that know what would happen to them if they fracture codified law and intentionally do not. 300 million of us vs thousands in government.

    source

    • EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Well not 300 million of us, since seemingly every registered Republican in the nation is also ecstatic about tearing the constitution to pieces. And they’re nearly the only ones among us who actually choose to own guns and have the capacity to actually do anything about it.

      source

      • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Be pedantic all you want. Millions versus thousands wins.

        source
• Zexks@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  The deportations. The arrest of the college op-ed journalist.

  source

  • vurr@lemm.ee ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I think presidents having immunity is essential to have a functioning democracy. Otherwise the party currently in power could arrest the previous president for something they allegedly did while in power and would set a bad precedent. I think it is best for the presidents to be immune unless impeached by both the house and senate for something particularly heinous. And yes, Trump should probably have been impeached already after the insurrection, but that doesn’t change the fact that you can’t just willy-nilly arrest some ex president. There is separation of power for a good reason: to not give too much power to any branch of government.

    source

    • Khanzarate@lemmy.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      No.

      Of course even the president has a right to due process, but no. If the president commits treason, he doesn’t get to be immune to that. A trial is warranted and an arrest if found guilty is correct.

      Yes, corruption could hypothetically rig such a trial. But a president immune from the consequences of his actions means there only needs to be one person corrupted to ruin a whole branch of government, instead of the hundreds it would take Congress to rig a trial.

      source

      • vurr@lemm.ee ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Thanks for the constructive feedback. If American system would have been functional enough to actually impeach and indict him then we wouldn’t have this conversation right now as his immunity would have been stripped. That’s impeachments whole point – to hold people in power, who are otherwise immune from prosecution accountable (at least that’s how I understand it), but I totally get where you’re coming from. It worked with Nixon as he probably would have been impeached had he not stepped down. I mostly agree with the points you raise nevertheless.

        source
      • shalafi@lemmy.world ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        The trial is called impeachment proceedings. We already have this covered.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• DrDeadCrash@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Allowing trump to run again after inciting an insurrection?

  source

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Again, not been a court case. If he tries, it will be shot down. There is no wiggle room for bullshit in the constitution about this.

    source

    • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Yes there has been a court case, Colorado didn’t want to put Trump on the ballot because of the insurrection clause, it went up to the supreme Court and they said it was A-OK.

      source